Provided by David Satcher, M.D., Ph.D.
Surgeon General of the United States of America
Chapter 2
Overview of Consumer and Family Movements
Origins and Goals of Consumer Groups
The consumer movement arose as a protest in the 1970s by
former patients of mental hospitals. Their antecedents trace back to the 19th
century, when a handful of individuals recovered enough to write exposés
expressing their outrage at the indignities and abuses inside mental hospitals.
The most persuasive former patient was Clifford Beers, whose classic book, A
Mind That Found Itself (1908), galvanized the mental hygiene reform movement (Grob,
1994). Beers was among the founders of the National Committee on Mental Hygiene,
an advocacy group that later was renamed the National Mental Health Association.
This group focuses on linking citizens and mental health professionals in
broad-based prevention of mental illness.
With the advent of deinstitutionalization in the 1950s, increasing numbers of
former patients of mental hospitals began to forge informal ties in the
community. By the 1960s, the civil rights movement inspired former patients to
become better organized into what was then coined the mental patients’
liberation movement (Chamberlin, 1995). Groups of patients saw themselves as
having been rejected by society and robbed of power and control over their
lives. To surmount what they saw as persecution, they began to advocate for
self-determination and basic rights (Chamberlin, 1990; Frese & Davis, 1997). The
posture of these early groups was decidedly militant against psychiatry, against
laws favoring involuntary commitment, and often against interventions such as
electroconvulsive therapy and antipsychotic medications (Lefley, 1996; Frese,
1998). Groups called Alliance for the Liberation of Mental Patients, the Insane
Liberation Front, and Project Release met in homes and churches, drawing their
membership from those with firsthand experiences with the mental health system.
Largely unfunded, they sustained their membership by providing peer support,
education about services in the community, and advocacy to help members access
services and to press for reforms (Furlong-Norman, 1988).
The book On Our Own (1978) by former patient Judi Chamberlin was a benchmark in
the history of the consumer movement. Consumers and others were able to read in
the mainstream press what it was like to have experienced the mental health
system. For many consumers, reading this book was the beginning of their
involvement in consumer organizations (Van Tosh & del Vecchio, in press). Early
consumer groups, although geographically dispersed, voluntary, and independent,
were linked through the newsletter Madness Network News, which continued
publication from 1972 to 1986. During the same era, the Conference on Human
Rights and Against Psychiatric Oppression was established and met annually from
1973 through 1985 (Chamberlin, 1990). In 1978, early consumer groups gained what
they perceived as their first official acknowledgment from the highest levels of
government. The President’s Commission on Mental Health stated that “. . .
groups composed of individuals with mental or emotional problems are being
formed all over the United States” (President’s Commission on Mental Health,
1978, pp. 14–15). To date, racial and ethnic minority group members are
underrepresented within the consumer movement proportionate to their growing
representation in the U.S. population. There is a need for more outreach and
involvement of consumers representing the special concerns of racial and ethnic
minorities.
The advocacy positions of consumers have dealt with the role of involuntary
treatment, self-managed care, the role of consumers in research, the delivery of
services, and access to mental health services. By 1985, consumer views became
so divergent that two groups emerged: The National Association of Mental
Patients27 and the National Mental Health Consumers’ Association. The former
opposed all forms of involuntary treatment, supported the prohibition of
electroconvulsive therapy, and rejected psychotropic medications and
hospitalization. The latter organization held more moderate views for improving
rather than eschewing the mental health service system (Lefley, 1996; Frese,
1998). Both groups eventually disbanded, but the differences of opinion that
they reflected became deeply entrenched.
Next
Back to the Mental Health: The Surgeon General's Report Table of Contents
